Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Arctic region is warming at nearly four times the global average rate, leading to a dramatic decline in sea ice extent. This phenomenon, documented extensively by the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), has opened up new opportunities and challenges, particularly for the eight nations comprising the Arctic Council: Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States. While the Council aims to promote cooperation, the increasing rates of Arctic sea ice melt reveal a potential divergence between the interests of the Arctic Council nations – driven by economic and strategic gains – and the broader global imperative to mitigate climate change and its consequences.
The Diverging Interests
The interests of Arctic Council nations are increasingly shaped by the opportunities presented by a receding ice cap, which often conflict with global climate goals.
Resource Extraction
- Oil and Gas: Russia, with the largest Arctic territory, is heavily invested in developing its Arctic oil and gas reserves (Yamal LNG project is a prime example). Similarly, the US (Alaska) and Canada are exploring potential resource extraction. These activities contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions, exacerbating the problem of Arctic melt.
- Mineral Resources: The Arctic is estimated to hold substantial mineral deposits, including rare earth elements. Nations like Canada and Greenland are keen on exploiting these resources, potentially leading to environmental damage and further contributing to climate change.
Shipping Routes
- Northern Sea Route (NSR): Russia is actively promoting the NSR as a shorter shipping route between Europe and Asia. Reduced sea ice makes this route increasingly viable, offering economic benefits to Russia but also raising concerns about increased black carbon emissions and potential environmental disasters.
- Northwest Passage (NWP): Canada also views the NWP as a potential shipping route, asserting its sovereignty over the passage. Increased shipping activity poses risks to the fragile Arctic ecosystem.
Strategic and Military Considerations
- Increased Military Presence: Russia has been rebuilding its military infrastructure in the Arctic, including reopening Soviet-era bases. Other Arctic nations, like the US and Canada, are also increasing their military presence to assert their interests and monitor the region. This militarization adds to geopolitical tensions and diverts resources from climate mitigation efforts.
- Sovereignty Claims: Disputes over territorial claims in the Arctic, particularly regarding the Lomonosov Ridge, further complicate international cooperation and prioritize national interests over global concerns.
The Wider World’s Interests
The wider world’s interests are fundamentally linked to the preservation of the Arctic as a crucial component of the global climate system.
- Climate Regulation: The Arctic plays a vital role in regulating global temperatures and ocean currents. Melting sea ice disrupts these processes, contributing to more extreme weather events worldwide.
- Sea Level Rise: The melting of Arctic glaciers and the Greenland ice sheet contributes to global sea level rise, threatening coastal communities and ecosystems.
- Biodiversity Loss: The Arctic is home to unique and vulnerable ecosystems. Melting sea ice threatens the survival of iconic species like polar bears and walruses.
Table: Contrasting Interests
| Arctic Council Nations | Wider World |
|---|---|
| Economic gains from resource extraction & shipping | Climate change mitigation & adaptation |
| Strategic advantage & territorial control | Global environmental stability |
| Short-term economic benefits | Long-term ecological sustainability |
The Arctic Council, while a forum for cooperation, is often constrained by the national interests of its member states. While it has working groups focused on environmental protection, its ability to enforce stringent environmental regulations or limit resource extraction is limited by the principle of state sovereignty.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the Arctic Council provides a platform for dialogue, the increasing rates of Arctic sea ice melt highlight a fundamental tension between the economic and strategic interests of Arctic nations and the broader global need for climate action. The pursuit of resource extraction, shipping routes, and strategic positioning by Arctic Council members often prioritizes short-term national gains over long-term global sustainability. A more robust international framework, potentially beyond the scope of the Arctic Council, is needed to ensure that the Arctic’s future is guided by principles of environmental stewardship and global cooperation.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.